Loading...
2018.12.06 F.P Clark Memo) To: Robert I. Goodman, Chairman, and the Planning Board of the Village of Rye Brook Date: December 6, 2018 Subject: 259 North Ridge Street – Subdivision, Zoning Petition and Map Amendment, and Revised Site Plan Application As requested, we reviewed revised site plans and additional and revised information submitted in support of a three-lot subdivision, and a site plan and petition to re-zone Lot 1 of the subdivision into the FAH District, submitted by Lazz Development (Louis Larizza), contract vendee, on behalf of the property owner, Daniel Greto. The original site plan application submitted for Lot 1 in September of 2015, sought to construct eight Fair and Affordable Housing (AFFH) units. The newly revised development plan for Lot 1 reduces the number of housing units to a total of four AFFH units divided into two, two-family homes. The subdivision remains unchanged, and, in addition to Lot 1, still includes two lots (Lot 2 and Lot 3) each with one single-family market-rate home. The property is situated at the intersection of West Ridge Drive and North Ridge Street within the R-15 District and the North Ridge Street Scenic Road Overlay District, Section 135.35, Block 1, Lot 11 on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor’s Map. Property Description The 3.96-acre (172,620 square-foot) property is partially developed with a one-story single-family home, driveway and curb cut, and a terrace at the back of the home in the rear yard. Behind the home, the lot slopes down very steeply to the northeast from the elevation of North Ridge Street to approximately the elevation of the rear yards of homes along Eagles Bluff and Rock Ridge Drive. The site drains to wetlands located in the woodlands below the existing home and from there into a pipe within a drainage easement across one of the properties on Eagles Bluff. Outside the landscaped area around the existing home, the lot is naturally wooded, with watercourses and wetlands mostly located in areas of lower elevations. Project Description The Applicant’s latest revised proposal is for a three-lot subdivision to create two, 2 single-family building lots (Lot 2 and Lot 3) that would remain in the R-15 District, and a third building lot (Lot 1), which would be re-zoned into the Fair and Affordable (FAH) District for development of two sets of two semi-attached, single-family homes (a total of four AFFH units). Each of the two buildings would have a curb cut, a two-car garage and surface parking for three additional cars. The application also includes a zoning petition for Lot 1, a request for a Zoning Map amendment, and a revised site plan application for Lot 1. The revised Lot 1 site plan requires approval of wetlands and steep slopes permits by the Planning Board. The original application was referred by the Board of Trustees to the Planning Board for a report and recommendation in September, 2015 and the Planning Board submitted a report and recommendation to the Trustees in September, 2016. In addition, the original application was referred to Westchester County Planning Board, which provided comments to the Village on October 31, 2016. The newly submitted substantial revision of the revised application under review in 2016 was re- referred to the Planning Board on November 8, 2018 for a new report and recommendation. Review We reviewed the revised application, the zoning petition and map amendment, the preliminary subdivision plat, revised site plans, new correspondence, and supporting materials submitted by the Applicant that include the following items: 1. Short Environmental Assessment Form dated April 11, 2018 2. Application for Subdivision of Land, not dated or signed 3. Petition to the Board of Trustees to Re-Zone New Lot 1 into the FAH District from Pawling Holdings, LLC, prepared by Clark Neuringer, R.A., Mamaroneck, N.Y., dated May 15, 2015 4. Application for Site Plan Approval for Lot 1, not dated or signed 5. Site Plan Submittal Review Checklist for Lot 1, not dated or signed 6. Two Exterior Building Permit Applications for Lot 1, not dated or signed 7. Two Applications for Site Plan Approval for Lots 2 and Lot 3, not dated or signed 8. Two Site Plan Submittal Review Checklists for Lots 2 and 3, not dated or signed 9. Two Exterior Building Permit Applications for Lots 2 and 3, not dated or signed 10. Wetland Delineation and Functional Assessment prepared by Tim Miller Associates, Inc., Cold Spring, N.Y., dated October 26, 2015 11. Storm Water Report, prepared by Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C., Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y., dated April 12, 2018 12. Report Memorandum regarding the estimated number of school children generated by development on Lot 1 prepared by RH Consulting, White Plains, N.Y., dated March 16, 2016 3 13. Traffic Generation Worksheets, prepared by Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C., Croton- on-Hudson, N.Y., no date 14. Tree Inventory and Mapping for Entire Property prepared by Paul D. Muscariello, Certified Arborist, dated February 2, 2016 15. Tree Inventory and Removal Plan for Lot 1, prepared by Anthony Zaino, RLA, Westchester County Planning Department, dated 8/9/18 16. Revised Zoning Analysis Memorandum to the Rye Brook Board of Trustees from Michael J. Izzo, Building and Fire Inspector, dated October 19, 2018 17. Response Letter to the Rye Brook Building and Fire Inspector from Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C., Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y., dated October 29, 2018 18. “Topographical Survey of Property,” prepared by Link Land Surveyors, P.C., Mahopac, N.Y., dated January 15, 2016 19. “Preliminary Subdivision Plat,” prepared by Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C., Croton-on- Hudson, N.Y., dated April 10, 2018 20. Planting Plan for Lot 1, prepared by Anthony Zaino, RLA, Westchester County Planning Department, dated April 8, 2018 21. Engineer’s Plans (Revised Site Plans for Lots 1, 2 and 3), prepared by Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C., Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Title Dated 0 of 5 Cover Sheet and Drawing Schedule 8/27/18 1 of 5 Site Plan, Grading/Layout 4/10/18 2 of 5 Utility Plan 4/10/18 3 of 5 Erosion Control Plan 4/10/18 4 of 5 Sight Distance Study 4/10/18 5 of 5 Details/Notes 2/21/18 22. Two Sets of Builder’s Plans (Lot 1 Building 1A and Building 1B), Lazz Development/Pawling Holdings, Port Chester, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Title Dated 1 Elevations 4/27/18 2 Elevation Calculations, Fire Ladder Diagrams, and Site Section 1/23/18 3 Foundation Plan 4/27/18 4 First Floor Plans 4/27/18 5 Second Floor Plans 4/27/18 Please note that our review is limited to planning, zoning and environmental issues. We have the following comments regarding the applications: 4 1. Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). A Short EAF was provided with the current application revisions. However, the original application included a Full EAF. The newly revised application requires a new Full EAF with the data for the current revised plans. The new FEAF should be filled in on the NYSDEC EAF website using the EAF Mapper feature to include data on the form from the DEC database. The revised Full EAF must be submitted with the EAF Mapper Summary Report that will be generated with the form. 2. SEQRA Review. Environmental review pursuant to SEQRA is required for the revised Lot 1 site plan as part of the combined action of the subdivision, and map amendment to re-zone proposed Lot 1 into the FAH District and the Lot 1 site plan. All the information and analyses provided for the original subdivision and site plan should be updated for the revised application and site plan. 3. Additional Planning Information Needed. The following plans and updated information are required for the revised applications: a. New signed and dated Full EAF and Mapper Summary Report; b. An updated tree preservation and protection plan that complies with the requirements of Chapter 235 of the Village Code for the revised Lot 1 site plan; c. The 100-foot regulated wetland buffers on all site plans should be dimensioned to indicate the width of the buffer; d. A revised landscape plan that conforms to the latest revisions to the Lot 1 site plan; e. A revised photometric lighting plan for the Lot 1 site plan; f. At least two site/building sections through Lot 1 that clearly show the existing and proposed revised grades, locations and heights of new retaining walls, guide rails and fences, grading for stormwater management features and the location of the limits of the wetland and wetland buffer; g. A revised estimate of the number of school children generated by the revised building plans; h. An updated wetland delineation and functional analysis, and the limits of the wetland buffers; i. A site plan for Lot 1 that is at a scale that shows all critical dimensions of parking areas, parking spaces, handicapped access spaces, driveway widths, patios, handrails, walkways and exterior stairs; j. An updated statement regarding the potential increase in energy use from the revised development plan and the specific ways in which all of the new homes would be designed to reduce energy demand and potable water consumption; and k. A revised preliminary construction management and logistics plan for construction of the revised Lot 1 development plan. 5 4. Alteration of Land and Topography. The revised site plan for Lot 1 would be located on the steep slopes, and will be required to comply with the Village Code regulations regarding steep slopes for approval of a Steep Slopes Work Permit. We continue to recommend that the design of the revised site plan for Lot 1 should ensure that the plan causes the least disturbance practicable to regulated slopes and the vegetation on these slopes, the creation of the least amount of new steep slopes, and limited utilization of tall or long retaining walls and/or multiple terraced retaining walls. 5. Wetlands and Wetland Buffers. The current drainage pattern of Lot 1 would be altered by development of the lot. The revised Lot 1 site plan also would disturb a limited area of wetland buffer to create a stabilized outlet from a small drainage basin located outside of and adjacent to the limit of the buffer. Changes and work within the wetland buffer will be required to comply with the Village Code regulations regarding wetlands and may require approval of a Wetlands Permit. The site plan should provide a calculation of the area of disturbance within the buffer, including grading, removal of existing vegetation and construction of structures. 6. Revised Site Plan. The new revised Lot 1 site plan reduces disturbance of steep slopes compared to the original and revised site plans proposed in 2016. The new site layout is closer to that of two adjacent single-family homes and lots in Rye Brook when viewed from North Ridge Street. However, the Applicant should provide more visual information simulating the views of the new buildings, the regraded rear yards, new parking areas and retaining walls as seen from residential lots and the roadway on North Ridge Street, and from down-slope of the site on Eagle’s Bluff. 7. Soils. The original Full EAF indicates the average depth to bedrock on the site is 0 to 6 feet, and the survey indicates the presence of rock outcrops on the proposed Lot 1. The Applicant should clarify if blasting or other methods of rock removal will be necessary during construction. If rock removal will be required, the proposed construction management plan should include discussion regarding the potential impacts of rock removal and the mitigation measures for impacts related to noise, air quality and vibration, and compliance with the Rye Brook Village Code and best management practices regarding blasting and/or other types of rock removal. 8. Transportation, Site Access Considerations. Site Access Analysis. The Applicant submitted a Site Plan indicating the measured Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) for the proposed two northerly site access drives to North Ridge Street. The measured ISD for the proposed northerly driveway is 400 feet to the north and 275 feet to the south. For the proposed southerly site access drive it measures 400 feet to the north and 300 feet to the south for ISD, as provided by the Applicant. 6 In previous analyses for the same site it was determined that the required ISD for the 85th percentile speed of 40 miles per hour on North Ridge Street should be 445 feet. However, for the posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour the ISD would be 335 feet. Further, if the Applicant was to use Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) for 40 miles per hour, as previously suggested by the Westchester County Department of Public Works, the required SSD would be 305 feet. Based on this information, it is recommended that the Applicant provide one additional profile for SSD for motorists traveling from the south on North Ridge Street to the proposed new southerly access drive. This analysis is needed to determine if adequate SSD can be provided since adequate ISD will not be provided. For reference purposes the measurement of SSD for motorists traveling northbound on Ridge Street and approaching this new southerly driveway is measured at a 2.0 feet above the pavement at the site driveway within the travel lane of North Ridge Street to a point at a height of 3.5 feet for the approaching vehicle. This is a different calculation than what was used for ISD. Estimation of Site Traffic Generation. The proposed revised redevelopment of the subject property will maintain the two single-family homes and construct four FAH units in two buildings. This level of residential development will generate a minimal number of additional vehicle trips on North Ridge Street and in our opinion, have a minimal impact, if any, on overall traffic operations other than traffic movements at the proposed site access drives. For this reason, the measurements of ISD and SSD are important to minimize traffic conflicts and ensure adequate access considerations for the proposed driveways. Recommendations. The Applicant should provide SSD at least to the southerly driveways of the single-family homes, which will be upgraded or developed. The originally proposed site access drives to the two southerly homes will be maintained; however, the Applicant should evaluate existing SSD and provide improvements by removing or maintaining any vegetation along the site frontage and within the right-of-way of North Ridge Street beyond the site frontage. In earlier reviews, the Village indicated a concern with the T-type intersection of North Ridge Street at West Ridge Drive. Previously this office recommended the Applicant provide pavement-marking improvements to reduce the amount of pavement area and to improve where a stopped vehicle on the eastbound approach of the West Ridge Drive at the intersection can be placed to improve sight distance looking to both north and south. It is our 7 opinion that the Applicant should still consider and include these modifications to this intersection, as discussed in past reviews for the subject property. The final plan should incorporate all of the recommendations from our earlier transportation reviews including the flashing curve/driveway warning signs, and clearing of vegetation. We do not recommend installing a crosswalk near the site. 9. Land Use and Zoning. The Proposed Action includes a zone change for Lot 1 from the R-15 District to the Fair and Affordable Housing (FAH) District. The FAH District regulations allow the Board of Trustees to waive the underlying dimensional requirements of the R-15 District for more units than would otherwise be allowed to accommodate the new revised site plan for four AFFH residential units. Though increased density may be allowed on the lot, Lot 1 would be approximately 4 times the size of a 15,000 square-foot, minimum-sized lot in the R-15 district. All of the three new lots will be located within the North Ridge Street Scenic Road Overlay District (SROD), which includes special regulations to help protect the scenic qualities of North Ridge Street that include increased front yard setbacks and 35-foot vegetative buffers along the street frontage. The FAH District regulations would allow the Trustees to alter required front yard setbacks to allow the increased density. The potential for visual impacts to neighbors surrounding the site and the North Ridge Street scenic road should be analyzed and reviewed. 10. Community Character. The Applicant provided an estimate of the number of schoolchildren that would be generated by development for the originally-proposed eight AFFH units and two single-family homes. The Applicant should provide an updated analysis of the number of school children that would be generated by the four new, three-bedroom AFFH units in the revised Lot 1 site plan and the two single-family homes on the market-rate lots. The Rye Brook Emergency Services Task Force will review the revised Lot 1 site plan with regard to emergency services capacity and access to the new residences. 11. Visual Impacts. Night lighting of the two parking areas on the revised Lot 1 site plan may be a source of visual impacts to residences surrounding the lot and the North Ridge Street SROD. To eliminate excessive glare to residences surrounding the site and to the SROD, especially in the winter when deciduous trees are leafless, we recommend use of shielded, residential-type light LED fixtures mounted no higher than 12 feet from the ground for night-lighting on the site and a landscape plan that provides screening along critical areas of the lot that may produce visual impacts at night. 12. Construction. The location and terrain of Lot 1 raise concerns regarding the impacts that may arise during construction. The Applicant should provide a draft construction 8 management and logistics plan that identifies and estimates the impacts of construction based on the new revised Lot 1 site plan, and explains how the impacts, such as increased traffic, increased demand for parking, construction traffic routing, need for materials storage and staging areas, impacts to air quality, security and safety on the construction site, increased noise, vibration, potential erosion and sedimentation, potential for rock removal or blasting, etc. will be eliminated or mitigated by the construction management plan. The plan should demonstrate compliance with Village Code requirements regarding construction, and identify and employ specific best practices pertinent to the site and the development plan. We look forward to discussion with the Planning Board. Michael A. Galante Managing Principal Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, RLA, AICP Senior Associate/Planning/Environment cc: Mayor Paul S. Rosenberg and the Village Board of Trustees Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Michal Nowak, Village Engineer/Superintendent of Public Works Jennifer L. Gray, Esq., Village Attorney Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E. J:\DOCS2\500\Rye Brook\538.717.259NRidgeSt.MapAmendmentSudivisionRevisedFAHSitePlan.memo.mtm.docx